BOARD00261

• Board Meeting Date: 5/13/1964
• Description: Table of Contents, Agenda, Minutes and Resolution
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

I

MR. STAPLETON:

MR. SHERMAN:

MR. STAPLETON:

MR. SHERMAN:

I

and this Great Northern Project will take
care of the flood control for Craig. Talk-
ing of flood control, it seems rather out of
place. We haven't had water enough for floods
for ten years but we have had lots of damage
in Craig in previous years from floods.

These things are pretty important to that
community over there and I think probably just
as important as the Basalt Project is."

"folr. Sherman, may I ask, do you have any
objection to the combination of the Juniper
Project with the Great Northern Project?"

"I "No, the only thing I have objection to
is that we got away from the Great Northern
Project when we named it as the Juniper. I
think it would have been better to cali it
the Juniper-Great Northern. But then that's
all right. No, the combination of the two is
perfectly all right. We've got to have the
Juniper."

"Let me state that your comments are
timely because we have not yet had a motion
on all of the projects here. you are arguing
that the Great Northern Project should be
ahead of Basalt and this is timely because
we have not passed a motion in terms of these
priorities."

"It's very important to that community
over there. Remeffiber. we paid, and I'm glad
that Governor Ed has brought out the point,
for this compact by giving Utah half the
water and it was all right. Judge Stone made
a deal there and it was perfectly all right.
We have given up half of our water over there
to get the compact for the whole Colorado
River. We made a deal. We haven't got a
project on either the White or the Yampa and
I think that we should be considered for that
reason. We haven't got a thing over there
and we are losing our water every day. I
think that it's time that we had some priority,